MINISTERS bowed to cross-party criticism of Tony Blair’s plan to abolish the post of Lord Chancellor by accepting that it will be months before he can give up his seat on the Woolsack.

Lord Williams of Mostyn, the Leader of the Lords, admitted yesterday that there was no consensus among peers about how to choose a new speaker or chairman for the Upper House.

He said that instead a select committee of peers would be set up to recommend who should preside in the Lords and whether it should be an elected office or appointed by other means.

No member of the Government will sit on the committee, which will also consider whether the office should be a salaried one, its title and tenure and whether the occupant will inherit the Lord Chancellor’s grand state and private apartments in the Lords.

The announcement, which peers welcomed, marked an acceptance that Lord Falconer of Thoroton will continue to sit on the Woolsack into the autumn and at the State Opening of Parliament.

After announcing plans to replace the post of Lord Chancellor with a Constitutional Affairs Secretary, the Prime Minister’s spokesman had said that Lord Falconer would not sit as speaker in the Lords, with a caveat that this would be by agreement.

Several peers indicated yesterday that they wanted the new post as presiding officer to retain the title Lord Chancellor.

Lord Williams told the Lords that 80 peers had responded to a week-long consultation but he “would not pretend there is consensus”.

Many agreed that the Lords itself rather than the Government should choose its presiding officer, but some were against any change and saw benefit in the traditional arrangement, he said.

Most were for electing a speaker but some wanted safeguards, such as a minimum threshold for nominations from each party and the cross benches.

A minority wanted a Speaker with greater powers to call peers and ensure order in the Lords, but most wanted to keep the convention of self-regulation by which peers themselves agree who should speak at Question Time.

Lord Williams said that a motion to establish the committee would be tabled on July 3 and it would start work before the summer recess and report by the end of the parliamentary session in October, aiming to make changes early in the next session.

Lord Strathclyde, the Tory peers’ leader, welcomed the move, saying that the Prime Minister should have done this at the outset, but said there was no need for change.

Baroness Williams of Crosby, for the Liberal Democrats, applauded the establishment of a select committee but appealed for the title of Lord Chancellor to be retained because of its historical associations and to give authority to its holder in representing the Lords.

The Leader of the Lords told her there was support among peers for keeping the title Lord Chancellor, although this was for the committee to discuss.

Other titles considered were Presiding Officer, for which there was little support; Speaker, which many thought risked confusion with the Commons; Lord President, although a Cabinet Minister has this title; and Lord Speaker.

The select committee will also consider the ceremonial role of the new speaker, the post’s seniority in relation to others, and whether to appoint deputy speakers.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Sex and the old: We’ve never had it so good
• Who’s afraid of the seven times table
• The lives of the Lehman ladies